Call me a Conservative, but perhaps until otherwise specified just exchange
'lithium battery' with FIREWORKS on the subject line :)
On Feb 26, 2016 5:20 PM, "Brad Casterline" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Don't anybody be packing any Hoover Boards too tightly, especially in
> combustible containers.
> On Feb 26, 2016 5:05 PM, "Pat Thompson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I would agree with Bruce's assessment, NFPA 484 applies to combustible
>> metals. Among these metals are some scary things like lithium, sodium,
>> potassium, and magnesium. This standard does not address lithium used in
>> energy storage cells (aka batteries) or the storage of them.
>>
>> Please allow me to chime in with a peeve that I've developed that stems
>> from this topic (speaking in general, not specific to this forum). I would
>> caution anyone in the discussion to be aware of the difference between
>> lithium-ion batteries and lithium batteries. These are in fact quite
>> different animals and I've often seen discussion over the issue of 'lithium
>> batteries' when in fact the topic is actually lithium-ion. Here's a quick
>> comparison:
>>
>> Lithium-ion battery: rechargeable, uses salts of lithium (not lithium in
>> its elemental state), very common as consumer battery (cell phones,
>> laptops, tablets, portable power tools, the list goes on....)
>>
>> Lithium battery: lithium is present in its elemental metal state, not
>> rechargeable, less common as consumer battery (typically a replacement for
>> conventional alkaline batteries - your C, D, AAA, AA cells but with more
>> kick)
>>
>> The jury is still out on how to deal with these challenging products,
>> both of which are rapidly becoming ubiquitous in our modern world. I'm no
>> chemist but from what I've gleaned in reading is that the biggest issue
>> with the lithium-ion battery fire is not the presence of lithium but the
>> tremendous energy storage that these cells are capable of. Thermal runaway
>> can occur when stored in tight proximity in packaging, be it in a warehouse
>> or when being transported.
>>
>> For fire with lithium-ion batteries the consensus is cooling, i.e. water
>> - and lots of it. What this translates to in density I have no idea - this
>> is what FM, FAA and the aerospace industry, and many others are trying to
>> nail down.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Pat Thompson
>> ATS Alaska
>> Direct: 907-375-4176
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Bruce Verhei
>> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 12:13 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: Lithium battery storage
>>
>> Using NFPA 484 would be similar to using aluminum storage standards for
>> bringing a B-747-8 in a building.
>>
>> The lithium battery industry needs to address this in a reasonable manner.
>>
>> The aerosol industry did this. Maybe the lithium battery industry hasn't
>> done this because they can see what the answers are likely to be. Lots of
>> water. In-rack sprinklers. Vertical barriers every X lineal feet in racks.
>> Minimum aisle widths. Maximum pile sizes for non-rack storage.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Feb 26, 2016, at 10:17, Brad Casterline <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Storing lithium in a battery is probably different.
>> > Anyone see the guy on the news in a convinience store a few days ago
>> > whose e-cigarette went haywire in his front jeans pocket?
>> > It looked like a blowtorch!
>> >> On Feb 26, 2016 12:08 PM, "michael G" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Would the lithium battery storage fall under the requirements of
>> >> storage in NFPA 484? This does address lithium storage, but not
>> >> lithium battery storage.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> Michael Goodis
>> >> Estimator, Project Manager
>> >> IL#000635   NICET#135586
>> >> Key Fire Protection Enterprises LLC
>> >> 3200 Mike Padgett HWY
>> >> Augusta, GA 30906
>> >> Office- (706)790-3473
>> >> Cell- (706) 220-8822
>> >> Fax: (706) 738-2119
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
>> >> [email protected]]
>> >> On Behalf Of David Blackwell
>> >> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 10:32 AM
>> >> To: [email protected]
>> >> Subject: RE: Lithium battery storage
>> >>
>> >> FYI - In case some of you were not aware, the term has changed to SDS
>> >> and the requirements for the forms being produced now have changed.
>> >> See the OSHA website at
>> >> https://www.osha.gov/dsg/hazcom/effectivedates.html
>> >>
>> >> The following section of text was extracted [in part] from a document
>> >> linked from the main OSHA HCS page at
>> >> https://www.osha.gov/dsg/hazcom/:
>> >>
>> >> The Hazard Communication standard (HCS) has been revised to align
>> >> with the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification
>> >> and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS Revision 3, 2009). This includes
>> >> updates to the requirements for labeling and for safety data sheets
>> (SDSs).
>> >> [...]changes in enforcement due to the release of the revised HCS
>> >> published in the Federal Register on March 26, 2012. The revised
>> >> standard changes "hazard determination" to the specific requirements
>> >> for hazard classification of chemicals, standardizes label elements
>> >> for containers of hazardous\ chemicals, and specifies the format and
>> >> required content for SDSs. [...] Chemicals must be evaluated in
>> >> accordance with specific guidance outlined in Appendices A and B of
>> >> the standard. The hazard classification will result in the
>> >> specification of pictograms, signal word, hazard statements, and
>> >> precautionary statements which must be included on the labels.
>> >> Specifications for these label elements are provided in Appendix C of
>> >> the standard. The SDSs will have a standardized 16-section format
>> >> (see Appendix D of the standard) and includes the information from
>> >> the hazard classification (e.g., hazard class, pictogram).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Respectfully,
>> >>
>> >> David Blackwell
>> >>
>> >> David Blackwell, P.E.
>> >> Chief Engineer
>> >> (803)896-9833
>> >>
>> >> Office of State Fire Marshal
>> >> 141 Monticello Trail | Columbia, SC 29203
>> >> http://scfiremarshal.llronline.com/
>> >> (803)896-9800
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
>> >> [email protected]]
>> >> On Behalf Of [email protected]
>> >> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 9:57 AM
>> >> To: [email protected]
>> >> Subject: RE: Lithium battery storage
>> >>
>> >> *** SCDLLR NOTICE *** This email is from an external email address.
>> >> Please use caution when deciding whether to open any attachments or
>> >> when clicking links inside the email.
>> >>
>> >> You have to look at a consensus amongst data, not just one MSDS or
>> >> not just one study.
>> >>
>> >> In this particular case there are no absolutes, no guarantees of any
>> >> results.  Take the info provided and use that to make your best case
>> >> for a methodology.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Craig L. Prahl
>> >> Fire Protection Group Lead/SME
>> >> CH2MHILL
>> >> Lockwood Greene
>> >> 1500 International Drive
>> >> Spartanburg, SC  29303
>> >> Direct - 864.599.4102
>> >> Fax - 864.599.8439
>> >> CH2MHILL Extension  74102
>> >> [email protected]
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
>> >> [email protected]]
>> >> On Behalf Of å... ....
>> >> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 9:52 AM
>> >> To: [email protected]
>> >> Subject: Lithium battery storage
>> >>
>> >> Do we realize who writes those MSDS ?   Although MSDS content has
>> gotten
>> >> better over the years... just saying think about the quality of
>> >> analyses in some of those MSDS's.
>> >>
>> >> This commodity is non-standardized territory.
>> >> If ecological considerations are a factor, then dump loads of water
>> >> warrants a second look.
>> >>
>> >> We might be able to guarantee control of a Li-battery fire with lots
>> >> of water, but until we get *LOTS* of water, we can't guarantee
>> >> extinguishment using water only, either.
>> >>
>> >> The engineers at Boeing probably have some experience with suppressing
>> >> Li-battery fires.   Even though 'in safety there should be no
>> secrets...'
>> >> tell that to the economists.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Scot Deal
>> >> Excelsior Risk/Fire Engineering
>> >> Scot Deal
>> >> Excelsior Risk/Fire En
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> >> [email protected]
>> >>
>> >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink
>> >> ler.org _______________________________________________
>> >> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> >> [email protected]
>> >>
>> >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink
>> >> ler.org _______________________________________________
>> >> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> >> [email protected]
>> >>
>> >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink
>> >> ler.org
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> >> [email protected]
>> >>
>> >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink
>> >> ler.org
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl
>> > er.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> [email protected]
>>
>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> [email protected]
>>
>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Reply via email to